1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to fly swatters and, more particularly, is concerned with a spring-powered fly swatter.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Some fly swatters in the prior art which incorporate certain constituent elements described as springs are in fact swatters which are manually operated in the traditional mode but which incorporate a coiled-wire or other construction that contributes additional flexion to the swatter when swung by hand. These are not truly mechanically-operated or spring-powered devices. Examples of such inventions are found in the patents to Laubenstein, Koontz and Wood. U.S. Pat. No 1,179,114 (Apr. 11, 1916) to Laubenstein for a Fly Swatter teaches a manually operated device which utilizes a Z-shaped length of heavy wire bearing on both the handle and the swatting member to hold the two members in the same plane and to add flexion to the swatter as it is swung U.S. Pat. No. 1,479,046 (Jan. 1, 1924) to Koontz for a Fly Swatter describes a swatter formed substantially from wire, the frame portion having one side formed into coils denominated springs which are wrapped around the bent wire arms of the handle portion. The inventor's description of the function of the coiled wire portion is that of allowing a flexing action between the main body of the swatter and the handle when swung by hand, thereby preventing bending and fracturing of the wire frame at that point over a period of time. U.S. Pat. No. 1,591,870 (Jul. 6, 1926) to Wood for a Fly Swatter shows a manually-operated swatter comprised like Koontz's of two basic formed-wire parts, with a mesh screen held in place by a binding. The wire frame of the swatter head is coiled at each lower side about a triangular frame portion of the handle, at two separate points on each side, for the stated object of providing spring flexing ability and causing the swatter to return to its normal position after use.
In none of the above examples of prior art is the swatting element or head powered by the mechanical force of a spring; all are swung in the traditional manner of the manual fly swatter.
Fly swatters and similar devices which may truly be characterized as "mechanically operated", "automatic" or "spring-actuated" are also old in the art. All, however, teach mechanisms comprising a multiplicity of formed metal parts and elements such as frames, pivots, wheels, bars, pins, latches or bearings, requiring the use of metal forming equipment to fabricate and being expensive and time-consuming both to fabricate and to assemble.
More important, however, than the limitations of the prior art inventions in terms of manufacturing complexity and expense, is their relative lack of real utility. Most are bulky and intricate in operation. All are limited in their range of swatting arc and therefore their swatting power. Some are not even swatters in that they use a catching rather than swatting action. None of them solve the commonly experienced problem of frightening away the fly as a result of visible motion from the user and the device during the act of swatting. AIl of the above-related disadvantages will be seen more clearly in the ensuing descriptions of prior art patents known to this inventor.
The closest discovered art to the instant invention is found in U.S. Pat. No. 1,861,688 (June 7, 1932) to Crawford for a Fly Swatter. His device comprises a swatter head hinged on a handle and actuated by a spring element. However, Crawford teaches a hinge element which is discrete and at a distance from the spring element, with a bar of a smaller loop A1, A2 of the handle A rotating within a tubular portion B1 of a base or striking portion B, in journal bearing fashion. The separated spring element is a single spring wire coiled about the opposite side of loop A1, A2 and provided with a large central loop C at a right angle to its smaller loops on each side. As this central loop of the spring bears against base portion B, when released it drives the base upward and outward. Reference to Crawford's drawings reveals that, by virtue of loop segment A2 being located forward of loop segment Al and its attached spring C during swatting action, the spring is impeded in its arc to a maximum of approximately 180 degrees. This limits the range of arc of the striking element B2 under spring tension to the same half circle. Crawford further teaches an extensive use of formed metal parts, principally including a wire loop handle A in which the use of wire or other flexible rod is essential to operation of the release mechanism because the handle's opposite sides must be compressed in order to release it from its catch B4 to initiate the swatting action. Thus Crawford's device will not operate with a handle that is solid or non-compressible.
U.S. Pat. No. 1,515,158 (Nov. 11, 1924) to Miller describes, as well as claims, an Insect Catcher and specifically denies and therefore does not teach a fly swatter. The object of the invention is not to swat insects, but to catch them on the fly. Miller shows an extremely complicated mechanism comprising many separate parts and elements, mostly of metal, requiring great expense in terms of the cost of fabrication and assembly. The inventor describes this as the "simple form" of his invention. The insect catching elements consist of two opposing frames 5 and 11 which open and close in clamshell-like fashion to a maximum of an approximate right angle, as described in the inventor's specification. Coiled springs 22 are wrapped around the back bars of top catching frame member 11, their spring tension holding member 11 in a closed position against fixed member 5. The function of the springs is to assist the user in opening and closing the moveable frame member 11 against the fixed member 5.
U.
U.S. Pat. No. 1,639,292 (Aug. 16, 1927) to Hendrickson and Roholt for a Fly Swatter also teaches a complicated mechanical swatter, hinged at a material distance from the end of its handle H by means of a metal plate 3 with a cam slot 5 through which is extended a finger 6 carried by the end portion of an operating rod R. The rod, lying parallel to handle H and positively affixed to the handle at both ends, is operated by alternately applying and releasing pressure on a hand grip 8 which is pivotally connected to the rod R and handle H. Operation of the rod, which actuates striking element 17, is assisted by a single coiled spring functioning as an extension spring which encircles the rod longitudinally for a portion of its length. The drawings show that the range of motion of the striking element is limited to less than 180 degrees by the physical structure of the device. The inventor specifies that an object of his invention is to swat flies upon a ceiling or at points otherwise beyond ordinary reach.
U.S. Pat. No. 1,155,697 (Oct. 5, 1915) to Anderson for a Fly Killing Apparatus teaches a complicated trigger-and-hammer operated device utilizing a multiplicity of interconnecting parts to lift and close a moving striking element 32 in clamshell-like action against a rigid striking element 27, for the object of killing insects while on the fly. A spring member 33 is coiled about a pin 29 to exert pressure upon the movable striking element 32 and thus hold it in a normally closed position with opposing portion 27. An actuating rod 38 is positively affixed to striking element 32 at its one end and to the trigger mechanism at the other, to provide a means for opening and closing the opposing striking elements by squeezing and releasing the trigger 15 and thus rocking the hammer 16. The drawings show that the structure of the device substantially limits the range of separation of the two striking elements. Striking element 32 pivots not on the handle 10 but upon extensions 24 of a bracket 23 affixed to arms 11 extending at an acute angle from handle 10.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,292,299 (Dec. 20, 1966) to Mettler for a Spring Actuated Fly Swatter teaches a complicated mechanism also incorporating a trigger element 24 which when squeezed places a swat arm 27 under the spring load of a coiled spring section of the arm so as to impel the entire swat arm and swat pad 46 into the swatting motion. The swat arm is not spring loaded when the arm and trigger are in the cocked position but must be so loaded by squeezing the trigger 24. A separate return spring 37 is utilized for automatically returning the swat arm and trigger to the cocked position. A third spring 57, helical compression type, is seated in the handle and exerts an outward pressure on a latch member 42 to hold catch members 45 in engagement with the shoulders 28 and 29 of the swat arm 27 prior to triggering. The entire swat arm moves in the swatting arc until impeded by the structure of the spring as well as the handle, which limits the swat pad's maximum range of arc to substantially less than 180 degrees.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,871,125 (Mar. 18, 1975) to Wilson for a Mechanical Fly Swatter also discloses a mechanically intricate device in which the entire swatter arm 16 and swatter head or pad 14 are swung as a unit, as in Mettler. The actuating mechanism utilizes a frame assembly 20, an anchor block 24, and a pivot wheel 48 mounted on a hub 50 with a pivot pin 52. A trigger element 60 through its finger release extension 66 is biased in a counterclockwise direction by a return spring 68, thereby holding a latch pin 62 in a notch 58 in the rim of the pivot wheel. Depression of the finger release extension 66 displaces the trigger element 60 in a clockwise direction against the bias of return spring 68 in order to withdraw the latch pin 62 from the notch 58. An elongated coil spring 72, extension type, is attached to and aligned longitudinally with the frame assembly and extended about the pivot wheel 48 so that its loop end 74 is positively connected to the swatter arm 16, which is anchored to the pivot wheel 48. When the actuating latch pin 62 is withdrawn by depression of the trigger element 60, the spring 72 angularly displaces the entire swatter pad and arm through a wide arc in order to swat the insect. The actuating spring force results from the tendency of the longitudinally aligned extension spring to return to its former contracted position after having been stretched by the clockwise rotation of the pivot wheel to cock the device. Wilson also teaches a second form of the invention in substantially the same construction except that the trigger member 102 is on the underside of the frame member and is actuated by squeezing.
As can be seen from a review of the above-cited prior art, devices heretofore which have utilized springs in the actuation of the swatting element, or swatting arm and element together, are complicated in structure and operation, composed of many separate parts, outdated in their extensive use of formed metal parts, expensive and time consuming to fabricate and assemble, restricted in their range of spring-powered torque and thus their effectiveness, and last but perhaps most importantly they do little to solve an age-old problem in successfully swatting flies: to minimize the visible motion of the user and the swatting device in order to avoid the fly taking flight before it can be struck.
While Crawford's fly swatter may be accurately described as spring-actuated, that is, the spring causing the swatting element to start into its motion under spring force, it does not have the capability to continue under full spring tension for a full-circle arc. Such capability would provide not only stronger swatting force during all stages of the arc but also the ability to swat under spring force at points past the limited spring-powered arc of Crawford's device.
Nor can the complexity and expense of fabrication be overemphasized as a drawback to the prior art inventions. In our modern era, ease and economy of manufacturing and assembling products is essential to controlling costs, producing goods at reasonable prices, and thereby competing effectively with offshore manufacturers. There has been a historical need for a more effective mechanical flyswatter made of few and economical parts which can be quickly and cheaply assembled. If only manual fly swatters can be economically produced, then only manual fly swatters will be used.
Consideration of the above disadvantages points to the obvious need for a device which successfully addresses all of these problems and yet can be manufactured, assembled, shipped and sold at a cost approximating that of a traditional manual fly swatter.